The EPA is preparing to dramatically increase permissible radioactive releases in drinking water, food and soil after “radiological
incidents,” according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

What is termed a guidance that EPA is considering - as opposed to a regulation - does not require public airing before it’s decided upon.

Drinking water, for example, would have a huge increase in allowable public exposure to radioactivity, the group says, that would include:

A nearly 1000-fold increase in strontium-90

A 3000 to 100,000-fold hike for iodine-131

An almost 25,000 rise for nickel-63

The new radiation guidance would also allow long-term cleanup standards thousands of times more lax than anything EPA has ever before accepted,
permitting doses to the public that EPA itself estimates would cause a cancer in as much as every fourth person exposed, the group says.

These relaxed standards are opposed by public health professionals inside EPA, according to documents PEER said it obtained under the Freedom of
Information Act.

That some sick people running the EPA. Of course, the EPA are those bastards who said that everything was fine in NY after the WTC collapsed,
thousands have died and are dying from it, they said the corexit was safe, they said the oil in the gulf was safe.

And now they say that extreme radiation levels are safe.

Those people are bought and paid for by the corporation, before it was the people running NY and the White House, then it was BP and now they are paid
by the nuclear industry.

Oh, no ticket sir? It's fine, you're with the EPA. Free ticket to hell right here for you. You can go sit with the majority of congress and the
FDA, and have a nice trip. Please be sure to visit the TSA checkpoint before boarding, of course."

I try to normally be a loving and forgiving person, but I really think some among us deserve to burn in the lower levels.

These relaxed standards are opposed by public health professionals inside EPA, according to documents PEER said it obtained under the Freedom of
Information Act.

So obviously there are people in the EPA who aren't thoroughly corrupt and who instead are acting as whistle blowers and advocating for the health
and safety of people. I think that's important to note who's who and that it isn't the entire EPA who is corrupt. Good find.

It is two weeks and all we hear is its safe – safe – safe! Never in the history of the news have so many lies been spit out so fast. It is a
betrayal against humanity and it’s in full progress. The fact is that there never has been and never will be a safe level of nuclear radiation.
Crimes against humanity are being conducted in print because the danger is spreading with no legitimate suggestions given to people in terms of how to
best protect themselves.

There is no safe radiation levels period! This one has pushed me over the edge. I'm not sitting on the fence anymore, just waiting for the right
opportunity now. The EPA is my enemy, along with Monsanto and many others. No more playing nice. Lets rub their faces in their new standards, make
them eat the seafood and wash it down with reactor water. I want to be on their list because they are on mine now.

Second, Never, ever Trust what the EPA, or in fact, never trust what the government tells you. Why, because it is all lies.

Why do they lie ?

CONTROL. Control over a situation that is out of control. If the majority of citizens knew the truth about the Gulf Oil event and Coexit our leaders
would be facing prison time. However, in the United States Freedom of the Press is suspended and under the threat of felony charges if the press
reported the truth - No Out Cry from the citizen majority.

Now Radiation levels will be adjusted to compensate for the rise to exposure. Many of the EPA’s radiation monitoring stations are no longer
reporting current levels , or are off line, or down for maintenance, so the public information is CONTROLED, once again.

Two points of wisdom :

When someone shows you who they really are, believe them….the first time.

When you are told “Nothing to see here, just move along”, You should hear in your ears …DANGER, DANGER Will Robinson.

These relaxed standards are opposed by public health professionals inside EPA, according to documents PEER said it obtained under the Freedom of
Information Act.

So obviously there are people in the EPA who aren't thoroughly corrupt and who instead are acting as whistle blowers and advocating for the health
and safety of people. I think that's important to note who's who and that it isn't the entire EPA who is corrupt. Good find.

That's true. Some in the EPA are pocketed (in the back pocket of industries) but many on the ground are honest people who are working for the public
good. Like any organization- there is good and bad.

You realize, don't you, that it is health care professionals inside and a part of the EPA who are the whistle blowers in this, don't you? It's
obvious and has been for some time that the EPA has been corrupted and under-funded, sneered at by corporate friendly lawmakers (mostly Republicans
and Libertarians) but I find it a little reassuring that the whistle blowers are coming from inside. Read the article or see my post above.

In a way this is a relief because I don't need to wonder or question any more. I have seen the enemy and it is not someone from the Middle East, nor
is it someone from the "other political party", it's not the "dealer man" or the thief trying to survive, and most importantly the enemy is not
me! I have reached my tolerance limit and will feel guilty about nothing when the deed needs to be carried out.I will stand or die against my true
enemies!

If you believe that the EPA exists to protect your environment, then you are mistaken.

The "environment" they protect is the one that permits rich men to make money off suckers and fools.

Anything beyond the County and State level is a threat to individual liberty and should be eyed with much suspicion. As an iron-fist-organ of the
Federal Government, the EPA seeks to undermine State and local authority and to impede and halt human activity that does not directly profit a rich,
connected person or persons at the Federal Level.

Living in mining country I can tell you for sure if it weren't for the EPA I'd be surrounded by toxic waste - waste that the mining companies were
forced to clean up as well they should have been. I'm not saying they are great or without corruption but without them would we have any
environmental protections or any means of holding mining companies and other polluters accountable? I'm glad there are health professionals in the
EPA who are calling this out.

The EPA needs to be disbanned. They are Nazis when it comes to crap that is not important or has little impact on the big picture.

They are all about slaping rediculous fines on the average Joe. But let big rich companies like BP or anyone else screw up on a grand scale and it's
" Oh don't worry about that we will just raise the allowable limits".

I know I'm mixing topics here but that is how irritated this makes me.

You should know that per PEER's website release on the issue, they have been opposing
this move for years now----at least since 2009. All of these emails were obtained via FOIA and lawsuits, and it's not a move in response to
Japan.

I'm not saying it's a good or safe thing, only that it's not the EPA's response to the Fukushima issue. I doubt they will actually implement this
now, or at least soon after Japan, as it would be horribly obvious. But if they do, then yeah----that would be uncool.

You know all of the companies that could profit from this have money signs for pupils. They don't care and if there
was ever a good example this is one of them. It's all good if you get cancer and your hair falls out, just take these pills and such. End sarcasm.

Originally posted by 00nunya00
You should know that per PEER's website release on the issue, they have been opposing
this move for years now----at least since 2009. All of these emails were obtained via FOIA and lawsuits, and it's not a move in response to Japan.

That just makes it scarier. To me it looks like a preemptive strike against standards before a planned radiological fallout scenario unfolded. Maybe
not specifically for Fukushima but more likely for the reactors and dump sites in California that were purposely built on the San Andreas fault.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.